TY - JOUR
T1 - Is robotic gait training effective for individuals with cerebral palsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
AU - Conner, Benjamin C.
AU - Remec, Nushka M.
AU - Lerner, Zachary F.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported in part by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R03HD094583 and F30HD103318. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health, (grant number F30HD103318, R03HD094583).
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2022.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Aim: To determine if robotic gait training for individuals with cerebral palsy is more effective than the standard of care for improving function. Method: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched from 1980–January, 2022 for articles that investigated robotic gait training versus standard of care (i.e. physical therapy or standard gait training) for individuals with cerebral palsy. Articles were included if a randomized controlled trial design was used, and excluded if robotic gait training was combined with another neuromuscular intervention, such as functional electrical stimulation. A meta-analysis of outcomes measured in at least four studies was conducted. Results: Eight citations met all criteria for full-text review and inclusion in the meta-analysis. A total of 188 individuals with cerebral palsy, ages four to 35, and Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I–IV were studied. Level of evidence ranged from 2b–1b. All studies utilized a tethered, assistive device for robotic gait training. The overall effect was not significantly different between the robotic gait training and control interventions for six minute walk test performance (95% CI: −0.17, 0.73; P = 0.22), free walking speed (95% CI: −0.18, 0.57; P = 0.30), or Gross Motor Function Measures D (Standing) (95% CI: −0.29, 0.39; P = 0.77) and E (Walking, Running and Jumping) (95% CI: −0.11, 0.57; P = 0.19). Conclusion: Tethered robotic devices that provide assistive gait training for individuals with cerebral palsy do not provide a greater benefit for improving mobility than the standard of care.
AB - Aim: To determine if robotic gait training for individuals with cerebral palsy is more effective than the standard of care for improving function. Method: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched from 1980–January, 2022 for articles that investigated robotic gait training versus standard of care (i.e. physical therapy or standard gait training) for individuals with cerebral palsy. Articles were included if a randomized controlled trial design was used, and excluded if robotic gait training was combined with another neuromuscular intervention, such as functional electrical stimulation. A meta-analysis of outcomes measured in at least four studies was conducted. Results: Eight citations met all criteria for full-text review and inclusion in the meta-analysis. A total of 188 individuals with cerebral palsy, ages four to 35, and Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I–IV were studied. Level of evidence ranged from 2b–1b. All studies utilized a tethered, assistive device for robotic gait training. The overall effect was not significantly different between the robotic gait training and control interventions for six minute walk test performance (95% CI: −0.17, 0.73; P = 0.22), free walking speed (95% CI: −0.18, 0.57; P = 0.30), or Gross Motor Function Measures D (Standing) (95% CI: −0.29, 0.39; P = 0.77) and E (Walking, Running and Jumping) (95% CI: −0.11, 0.57; P = 0.19). Conclusion: Tethered robotic devices that provide assistive gait training for individuals with cerebral palsy do not provide a greater benefit for improving mobility than the standard of care.
KW - Cerebral palsy
KW - meta-analysis
KW - mobility
KW - robotic gait training
KW - systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85127368375&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85127368375&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/02692155221087084
DO - 10.1177/02692155221087084
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85127368375
JO - Clinical Rehabilitation
JF - Clinical Rehabilitation
SN - 0269-2155
ER -